TyperWoods said:
Do this mean Levy is out? Please please please
I'm not going anywhere.
TyperWoods said:
Do this mean Levy is out? Please please please
The Zookeeper said:Uhhhm ....deer corn said:Ragnar Danneskjoldd said:
I think he's been a net positive for A&M.
This is like saying, "I don't think Hitler liked Jews."
Wouldn't it be the polar opposite of saying that?
I think that Hitler and the Jewish folks had a bit of a problem with one another.deer corn said:The Zookeeper said:Uhhhm ....deer corn said:Ragnar Danneskjoldd said:
I think he's been a net positive for A&M.
This is like saying, "I don't think Hitler liked Jews."
Wouldn't it be the polar opposite of saying that?
Yes. I read this wrong.
Hellbent said:
By far the best Chancellor in the history of Texas A&M
murphyag said:Well you can thank the state legislature for it not being like the good old days. They ruined it when they passed the top 10% law for admissions to state universities.Ragnar Danneskjoldd said:yeah, definition of success will vary from person to person. I kindof wish A&M was still a relatively small school with legacy admission and you could still back your truck up to northgate.hunter2012 said:
I don't disagree about growing the university to new heights, but the growth should have been about half as fast as they pushed it.
Levy will pick the replacement. That was in the last contract extension they signed.TyperWoods said:
Do this mean Levy is out? Please please please
murphyag said:Well you can thank the state legislature for it not being like the good old days. They ruined it when they passed the top 10% law for admissions to state universities.Ragnar Danneskjoldd said:yeah, definition of success will vary from person to person. I kindof wish A&M was still a relatively small school with legacy admission and you could still back your truck up to northgate.hunter2012 said:
I don't disagree about growing the university to new heights, but the growth should have been about half as fast as they pushed it.
How did the other State U in Austin finagle a harder admission standard? They get away with top 6% but we have top 10% plus the Blinn program?NyAggie said:murphyag said:Well you can thank the state legislature for it not being like the good old days. They ruined it when they passed the top 10% law for admissions to state universities.Ragnar Danneskjoldd said:yeah, definition of success will vary from person to person. I kindof wish A&M was still a relatively small school with legacy admission and you could still back your truck up to northgate.hunter2012 said:
I don't disagree about growing the university to new heights, but the growth should have been about half as fast as they pushed it.
Government ruins everything
The written rule for UT isn't actually based on top 6%. It's still top 10%, but with the caveat that no more than 75% of their incoming class shall be auto-admitted via top 10%. They receive way more applications from top 10% students than they have space for, thus they can raise their standard until they hit that 75% auto-admit rate. The past few years this has been top 6%.OBJTEX said:How did the other State U in Austin finagle a harder admission standard? They get away with top 6% but we have top 10% plus the Blinn program?NyAggie said:murphyag said:Well you can thank the state legislature for it not being like the good old days. They ruined it when they passed the top 10% law for admissions to state universities.Ragnar Danneskjoldd said:yeah, definition of success will vary from person to person. I kindof wish A&M was still a relatively small school with legacy admission and you could still back your truck up to northgate.hunter2012 said:
I don't disagree about growing the university to new heights, but the growth should have been about half as fast as they pushed it.
Government ruins everything
BTW, I have no issue with Blinn but coupled with top 10 in a growing state along with our ever expanding enrollment...we have become a diploma mill. I am under the impression this was a conscience effort led by Chancellor Dull.
There are advantages to his strategy. Soon, there will be more Aggies than Shorthorns and eventually we will revise the PUC split. MAybe it is worth it. They are chasing the "more prestigious" school/degree brand. We are chasing "We are the biggest/baddest" brand.
Nate09 said:The written rule for UT isn't actually based on top 6%. It's still top 10%, but with the caveat that no more than 75% of their incoming class shall be auto-admitted via top 10%. They receive way more applications from top 10% students than they have space for, thus they can raise their standard until they hit that 75% auto-admit rate. The past few years this has been top 6%.OBJTEX said:How did the other State U in Austin finagle a harder admission standard? They get away with top 6% but we have top 10% plus the Blinn program?NyAggie said:murphyag said:Well you can thank the state legislature for it not being like the good old days. They ruined it when they passed the top 10% law for admissions to state universities.Ragnar Danneskjoldd said:yeah, definition of success will vary from person to person. I kindof wish A&M was still a relatively small school with legacy admission and you could still back your truck up to northgate.hunter2012 said:
I don't disagree about growing the university to new heights, but the growth should have been about half as fast as they pushed it.
Government ruins everything
BTW, I have no issue with Blinn but coupled with top 10 in a growing state along with our ever expanding enrollment...we have become a diploma mill. I am under the impression this was a conscience effort led by Chancellor Dull.
There are advantages to his strategy. Soon, there will be more Aggies than Shorthorns and eventually we will revise the PUC split. MAybe it is worth it. They are chasing the "more prestigious" school/degree brand. We are chasing "We are the biggest/baddest" brand.
As I posted earlier on thread, A&M's auto-admits make up 31% of the freshman class. So 2/3 of our freshman are outside of top 10%. The top 10% rule is not our problem, it's our leadership thinking that having the largest enrollment is some kind of point of pride.
USNews is hardly a verified methodology and primarily promotes small class sizes and higher school costs.Nate09 said:
I agree, there are some benefits to it - mostly $$$ related.
But people forget that A&M was ranked above UT by US News only 25 years ago!! Since then, we've fallen and they've risen. Enrollment has a lot to do with that.
The A&M System can educate a growing Texas population without breaking the flagship. Send more students to the rest of the system and build more campuses as required.
Admiral Nelson said:
Anyone else hearing speculation the Texas Comptroller, Glenn Hegar, is the top candidate to replace Sharp?
Ragnar Danneskjoldd said:
A&M is the second largest University in the country. Its not because of top 10%. The doors were thrown open, alot of degree programs that arent necessary, and credential inflation is now a human right.
murphyag said:Well you can thank the state legislature for it not being like the good old days. They ruined it when they passed the top 10% law for admissions to state universities.Ragnar Danneskjoldd said:yeah, definition of success will vary from person to person. I kindof wish A&M was still a relatively small school with legacy admission and you could still back your truck up to northgate.hunter2012 said:
I don't disagree about growing the university to new heights, but the growth should have been about half as fast as they pushed it.
OBJTEX said:How did the other State U in Austin finagle a harder admission standard? They get away with top 6% but we have top 10% plus the Blinn program?NyAggie said:murphyag said:Well you can thank the state legislature for it not being like the good old days. They ruined it when they passed the top 10% law for admissions to state universities.Ragnar Danneskjoldd said:yeah, definition of success will vary from person to person. I kindof wish A&M was still a relatively small school with legacy admission and you could still back your truck up to northgate.hunter2012 said:
I don't disagree about growing the university to new heights, but the growth should have been about half as fast as they pushed it.
Government ruins everything
BTW, I have no issue with Blinn but coupled with top 10 in a growing state along with our ever expanding enrollment...we have become a diploma mill. I am under the impression this was a conscience effort led by Chancellor Dull.
There are advantages to his strategy. Soon, there will be more Aggies than Shorthorns and eventually we will revise the PUC split. MAybe it is worth it. They are chasing the "more prestigious" school/degree brand. We are chasing "We are the biggest/baddest" brand.
That sounds difficult on its face, but the Texas Constitution has been amended 530 times since 1876, including 46 times in the last 10 years.TexAggie1999 said:OBJTEX said:How did the other State U in Austin finagle a harder admission standard? They get away with top 6% but we have top 10% plus the Blinn program?NyAggie said:murphyag said:Well you can thank the state legislature for it not being like the good old days. They ruined it when they passed the top 10% law for admissions to state universities.Ragnar Danneskjoldd said:yeah, definition of success will vary from person to person. I kindof wish A&M was still a relatively small school with legacy admission and you could still back your truck up to northgate.hunter2012 said:
I don't disagree about growing the university to new heights, but the growth should have been about half as fast as they pushed it.
Government ruins everything
BTW, I have no issue with Blinn but coupled with top 10 in a growing state along with our ever expanding enrollment...we have become a diploma mill. I am under the impression this was a conscience effort led by Chancellor Dull.
There are advantages to his strategy. Soon, there will be more Aggies than Shorthorns and eventually we will revise the PUC split. MAybe it is worth it. They are chasing the "more prestigious" school/degree brand. We are chasing "We are the biggest/baddest" brand.
The PUF funds were setup by the Texas Constitution. It would require an amendment to the Texas Constitution to change the split. That requires a 2/3 majority of the Texas House and Texas Senate. That isn't happening.
Also, the University of Texas System is still much larger than the Texas A&M System.
Hellbent said:
By far the best Chancellor in the history of Texas A&M
Admiral Nelson said:
Anyone else hearing speculation the Texas Comptroller, Glenn Hegar, is the top candidate to replace Sharp?
BartInLA said:
I will readily admit that my theory is not based on any experience, but here is my thinking.
1. We have by far the largest public university in the state.
2. Raise the standards incredibly so that we are considered a very highly competitive school.
3. Focus on STEM subjects.
4. Higher Nobel prize winners
5. Greatly reduce those students who are planning to be K-12 teachers and so forth.
6. Recruit very heavily among the Asian population. I know that's not PC and I know that the tradition and high spirit of the university might go down because that's just the way it is but we need some higher SAT and GRE scores.
7. We are big enough. Let's focus on being elite in virtually every area.
I know this is an overly simplistic idea, but please let's don't become a diploma mill. We put out some outstanding students who, has a median salary, command the highest of any public university in the state, and that's no doubt because of our heavy emphasis on STEM.
I majored in physics and engineering.
Neither did you.OBJTEX said:BartInLA said:
I will readily admit that my theory is not based on any experience, but here is my thinking.
1. We have by far the largest public university in the state.
2. Raise the standards incredibly so that we are considered a very highly competitive school.
3. Focus on STEM subjects.
4. Higher Nobel prize winners
5. Greatly reduce those students who are planning to be K-12 teachers and so forth.
6. Recruit very heavily among the Asian population. I know that's not PC and I know that the tradition and high spirit of the university might go down because that's just the way it is but we need some higher SAT and GRE scores.
7. We are big enough. Let's focus on being elite in virtually every area.
I know this is an overly simplistic idea, but please let's don't become a diploma mill. We put out some outstanding students who, has a median salary, command the highest of any public university in the state, and that's no doubt because of our heavy emphasis on STEM.
I majored in physics and engineering.
You surely didnt take hire level english classes.
Unemployed said:Neither did you.OBJTEX said:BartInLA said:
I will readily admit that my theory is not based on any experience, but here is my thinking.
1. We have by far the largest public university in the state.
2. Raise the standards incredibly so that we are considered a very highly competitive school.
3. Focus on STEM subjects.
4. Higher Nobel prize winners
5. Greatly reduce those students who are planning to be K-12 teachers and so forth.
6. Recruit very heavily among the Asian population. I know that's not PC and I know that the tradition and high spirit of the university might go down because that's just the way it is but we need some higher SAT and GRE scores.
7. We are big enough. Let's focus on being elite in virtually every area.
I know this is an overly simplistic idea, but please let's don't become a diploma mill. We put out some outstanding students who, has a median salary, command the highest of any public university in the state, and that's no doubt because of our heavy emphasis on STEM.
I majored in physics and engineering.
You surely didnt take hire level english classes.